Beau, Ben and Logan first discuss how to find a what to read, and Ben introduces the question: What makes a classic? It seems endurance, quality and popularity have something to do with it. And surely having someone to talk to about a book makes it all the more fun. But is the best of all time the same as the most popular? What is the role of genre in ranking them? Can you be someone who likes a lot of Sci-Fi but does not like Sci-Fi? And what are best-of lists even for? Be aware! Spoiler alert for Anna Karenina ahead!

Ben, Mike and Logan ask what it means "to take something back." They stumble into the topics of opinions versus facts, the value of a promise, and the proper way to crack an egg.

Happy Independence Day! In this episode, Aaqib, Ben, Ian, Logan, Mackenzie and Michael discuss what makes a government a government, and how in a moment of crisis, taking up the mantle of power gives an initial semblance of legitimacy. Or is legitimacy just a Phony-Bologna concept? They argue over whether there is a meaningful distinction between gangs and a government, and what that might come from. They ask is it possible to organize a government without the use of force? Is force distinct from violence? And what is there a relation between expectations and responsibilities? I'm happy to report we successfully answered one of these questions.

Aaqib, Ben, Ian, Logan and Mike ask if the 2000-2010 was a tough time for music. Opinions vary wildly. They discuss what is complexity in music now? How can music theory encompass the increasing importance of production? And how does technology of a given time change the how we should view its art?

Ben, Ian and Logan discuss the how to evaluate policy decisions and the wisdom of playing catch with a bowling ball from a tall building. It's hard to evaluate policy based on the consequence, but it seems ludicrous to evaluate it with another set of ethics. The higher up the boss, the further they are from things actually happening. So the most powerful are also the most powerless. Ian compares leaders to coaches to resolve (almost) this problem.

Ben, Logan and Mike exam what your moral obligation is in given scenarios. They discuss Peter Singer's famous shallow pond thought experiment, and consider whether that obligates you to be a lifeguard. They look at the moral obligations of Oscar Schindler and Peter Parker and try to decide what they would think of a coworker with an absurdly large cake.

In one of our most contentious episodes yet! Beau, Mike, Logan and Ben try to reconcile radically different views of what is Law, what is a State (or a state) and what claims a state has on its citizens (if any). They will discuss the command theory of law, the social contract, Max Weber's definition of a state and disagree of the concept and relevance of Legitimacy. It's an exciting Philosophical throw-down you don't want to miss!

Mike begins by asking Katie, Ben and Logan if, after a decade of meeting to discuss philosophy, they have gotten any better at Philosophy? The four of them discuss the skills of thinking deeply, as well as the art of listening deeply to create philosophical conversations. Later, Logan asks "when is it reasonable to believe something we do not know to be true?" He thinks that many things, our existence, ethics, our feelings fall into this category of things we cannot know, but the group (joined by Aaqib and Seamus) wonder together what justifies these beliefs? The group revisits Mike's original question. Without exploring the ideas yourself, you cannot understand them. When I was younger, there was an internal voice that questioned everything. And now there is an intellectual laziness that quiets that voice.